Summary: Mr X complained that the Council failed in its safeguarding duties towards him. We did not find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the way the Council handled safeguarding concerns about his neglect from the housing association. He says this has affected his physical and mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have investigated the Council’s safeguarding process up to the end of August 2024, as this what Mr X complained about in mid-August 2024 and the Council responded to a few weeks later. As explained in paragraph four the Council should have an opportunity to respond to any complaints, therefore if Mr X wanted to complain about any later events, he would need to raise these issues with the Council first.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance, including “Teeswide Inter Agency Safeguarding Adults Policy” and “Teeswide Safeguarding Adults Board Guidance: Other Enquiries”.
8. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative background

9. The safeguarding duties apply to an adult who:
• has needs for care and support;
• is experiencing, or at risk of, abuse or neglect;
• as a result of those care and support needs is unable to protect themselves from either the risk of, or the experience of abuse and neglect. (The Care and Support Statutory guidance, paragraph 14.2)
10. Local authorities must make enquiries, or cause another agency to do so, whenever abuse or neglect are suspected in relation to an adult and the local authority thinks it necessary to enable it to decide what (if any) action is needed to help and protect the adult. The scope of that enquiry, who leads it and its nature, and how long it takes, will depend on the particular circumstances. (The Care and Support Statutory guidance, paragraph 14.93)
11. The first priority should always be to ensure the safety and well-being of the adult. The adult should experience the safeguarding process as empowering and supportive. (The Care and Support Statutory guidance, paragraph 14.95)

Teeswide Safeguarding Adults Board Guidance: Other Enquiries

12. The enquiries where an adult does not meet all the Section 42 of the Care Act 2014 criteria but the council considers it necessary and proportionate to have a safeguarding enquiry are called “other safeguarding enquiries”. Each council has the jurisdiction to decide what safeguarding activity it undertakes for adults who do not meet the Section 42 criteria, such as when promoting an individual’s well-being under Section 1 of the Care Act.

What happened

13. This is not a full description of what happened but a summary of the events relevant to my decision.

Background

14. At the end of February 2024 the Council served a hazard awareness notice on the housing association (the Housing Association) which provides a property occupied by Mr X as a social tenant. The Council identified two defects, including damp and mould, which were not considered serious enough to warrant formal action.

First safeguarding concern

15. In mid-April 2024 the Council’s customer service received a safeguarding concern about Mr X from the Housing Association. Following early screening a safeguarding officer advised the customer service team the issue reported was more proper to be dealt with by housing and health services.
16. Mr X was not contacted about this matter and only found out about this correspondence through his subject access request brought in summer 2024.

Second safeguarding concern

17. In mid-June 2024 Mr X called the Council about his safeguarding. He explained he was in hospital and needed urgent action from his landlord once he returned to his house to prevent any further damage to his health.
18. On the same day Mr X complained about the fact the Council did not register the previous safeguarding concern about him on its system.
19. After some further correspondence from Mr X the customer service team logged the safeguarding concern received previously on the system and attached the safeguarding concern form from April 2024.
20. In response to Mr X’s correspondence the safeguarding team decided to carry out a hospital visit. Mr X was anxious about getting back home with the unresolved housing issues. A social worker completing the visit (the Social Worker) agreed to contact the Housing Association to discuss any outstanding issues and find out when the repairs could start.
21. A few days after Mr X’s discharge from hospital, the Social Worker called him to discuss his safeguarding concerns. The Social Worker visited Mr X the next day with an Occupational Therapist (OT). The OT carried out an assessment of Mr X’s mobility and concluded there was no need for support.
22. At the end of July 2024 Mr X contacted the Council’s head of access and safeguarding team (the Head of Safeguarding) and asked for a meeting. The Head of Safeguarding could not meet before mid-August but offered to talk to Mr X by phone. In the correspondence which followed the Head of Safeguarding explained that after Mr X’s allegations of abuse and neglect the Social Worker had carried out safeguarding enquiries, including a home visit. The Social Worker found Mr X did not have eligible care needs which would need support under the Care Act. The concerns he reported to the Council should be addressed by the Housing Association. Although there was no role for safeguarding, the Social Worker would contact the Housing Association to ensure they were addressing Mr X’s concerns.
23. After a meeting with the representatives from the Housing Association the Head of Safeguarding shared details of the discussions held with Mr X. She said the Housing Association customer relations team had been working to address Mr X’s concerns and the Housing Ombudsman had been investigating the Housing Association’s actions. The Head of Safeguarding decided there was no further role for the safeguarding team and told Mr X they would be closing the safeguarding enquiry.
24. At the beginning of August 2024 further communication, both in writing and by phone, took place between Mr X and the Head of Safeguarding. Mr X was extremely dissatisfied with the suggested outcome of his safeguarding enquiry.
25. In the letter from the end of August the Head of Safeguarding formally closed the safeguarding team involvement in the matters between Mr X and the Housing Association. The Head of Safeguarding:
• referred to the legislation and the Council’s policies about safeguarding;
• reiterated the Council’s position;
• explained that although Mr X’s circumstances did not meet the threshold for safeguarding involvement, the Social Worker had liaised with the Housing Association and another team of the Council to ensure they were addressing Mr X’s concerns.

Analysis

26. As explained in paragraph three when looking at the complaints we normally consider the process leading to councils’ decisions. If the process is right, we would not normally criticise these decisions.
27. Having received a “safeguarding concern” form from the Housing Association in April 2024 the Council decided it was not a safeguarding matter, as outlined in paragraph nine of this decision. To reach this conclusion the Council’s customer service team liaised with the safeguarding team. The Council was aware of Mr X’s ongoing housing complaints and considered this was the best way to address the issues mentioned in the form.
28. Following Mr X’s contact in June 2024, the Council took steps to decide whether it should carry out its safeguarding enquiries. The Social Worker visited Mr X in hospital and at his house and the OT assessed his mobility needs. Based on the information gathered the Council decided Mr X did not have needs for care and support so the Council’s safeguarding duties were not applicable to his situation.
29. Following the well-being principle and trying to ensure Mr X’s concerns were addressed, at the end of July and in the first part of August the Council liaised with the Housing Association and with another team involved in Mr X’s case. As explained in the Council’s policy quoted in paragraph 12 this is something the Council can choose to do.
30. In a letter to Mr X closing the safeguarding enquiry the Council provided reasons for its decision and advised on the complaint process.
31. When carrying out its actions the Council complied with the statutory guidance relevant to safeguarding and its policies. I did not find fault with the Council.

Back to top

Decision

32. I found no fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman